Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Giving a city statehood is crazy. What's next, giving New York City and Los Angeles and Chicago their own states? They have far more people each than DC. and how much land will the City of DC take from the federal government to form their state. Is not much of a plan. It's an awful plan in every angle from constitutionally, economics and power.
Puerto Ricans having U.S. by virtue of being born on Puerto Rico is purely statutory, so no constitutional concerns there if citizenship was to be stripped if the island became an independent nation.
.
There is no such thing as a "statutory" citizenship. Congress has constitutional powers to declare a territory their own and declare the people in it U.S. Citizens. All citizens are protected by the U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court decades ago declared that the government can't take your citizenship involuntarily once you have it.
If Puerto Rico becomes independent and the residents don't want to be under the U.S. jurisdiction, they have to formally renounce it by putting it in their constitution like the Pacific Islands after WW 2. Even sign a legal document that shows their intent.
I'm a U.S. Citizen. If I'm living in Puerto Rico in a house like many Americans do outside of the states and the local government declares their independence and the U.S. accepts it. The U.S. can't take away my citizenship unless I denounce it for another one. There has to be an action from my part. That includes the millions of U.S. citizens in the island. It's a mess in the courts, that's why independence for P.R. is not a reality.
There is no such thing as a "statutory" citizenship. Congress has constitutional powers to declare a territory their own and declare the people in it U.S. Citizens. All citizens are protected by the U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court decades ago declared that the government can't take your citizenship involuntarily once you have it.
If Puerto Rico becomes independent and the residents don't want to be under the U.S. jurisdiction, they have to formally renounce it by putting it in their constitution like the Pacific Islands after WW 2. Even sign a legal document that shows their intent.
I'm a U.S. Citizen. If I'm living in Puerto Rico in a house like many Americans do outside of the states and the local government declares their independence and the U.S. accepts it. The U.S. can't take away my citizenship unless I denounce it for another one. There has to be an action from my part. That includes the millions of U.S. citizens in the island. It's a mess in the courts, that's why independence for P.R. is not a reality.
Once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Yes, there is statutory citizenship. While all citizens regardless of source enjoy the same basic rights of citizenship, statutory citizenship can be revoked by, well, statute, while constitutional citizenship (via the 14th Amendment) cannot be. Congress can pass legislation stating that those in Puerto Rico no longer have US citizenship. Congress cannot pass legislation revoking citizenship rights of people born in actual states. There is nothing in the Constitution that would prevent Congress from revoking citizenship rights of people in US territories who were granted by statute.
The 14th Amendment in relavant part holds:
Quote:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The Constitution's most prominant citizenship provision clearly establishes certain constitutional protections for people born in U.S. states, not territories. Anything else developed by Congress is purely statutory.
Note, the only "issue" I could see with statutory citizenship revocation concerns due process. However, due process only generally requires notice and an opportunity to be heard. Thus, if Congress was to revoke statutory citizenship from those in PR currently possessing it (thus making it retroactive as well as forward looking), I would see some timeline allowed for island residents to migrate to and settle within the US to "vest" their citizenship so to speak. Those who didn't do so by a certain date would likely be left on the outside looking in.
Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 09-14-2020 at 09:17 AM..
If they don't feel Americans, they don't fly the U.S. Flag, they want to keep their own Olympics and Miss Universe and don't teach American Civics in their schools why would you make them a state? Respect their identity and how they want to be. They want to have their own identity under the protection of the U.S. Let them keep their status. If Puerto Ricans want to live in a state, they have 50 states to choose from like you have living in New York. Let Puerto Rico, an island of 130 x 35 miles (tiny) have their own identity which is their own system under the protection of the U.S.
In or out, not both.
If they want to stay Puerto Rican and preserve their identity, they have to be independent to do that.
That is an interesting plan, but not one that I'm sure would pass constitutional muster (I just don't know). I'd imagine some of the questions would be whether Maryland and Virginia--which gave up decent sums of territory to help form DC--would have an effective veto right over utilizing the land in a manner that was not agreed to when the land was given to the federal government to help establish and build the federal district centuries ago.
Definitely an interesting debate to be had on the issue!
Note, D.C. is 68.34 mi². The federal government owns 30% of land in DC, so the remaining 70% of the land would be incredibly tiny (nothing legally wrong with that but still an interesting point), though the current district is small itself. I'd also like to see how a map of the District minus the federally owned land would look Would any resulting state be continuous or broken apart into separate tracts of territory?
In any case, I don't see such happening (either DC or Puerto Rico) unless the Senate does away with the filibuster rule for legislation, where 60 votes are required to push through controversial pieces of legislation.
The Virginia portion of DC was returned in 1847. It is what is now Alexandria and Arlington. All that is left is the Maryland portion.
Once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Yes, there is statutory citizenship. While all citizens regardless of source enjoy the same basic rights of citizenship, statutory citizenship can be revoked by, well, statute, while constitutional citizenship (via the 14th Amendment) cannot be. Congress can pass legislation stating that those in Puerto Rico no longer have US citizenship. Congress cannot pass legislation revoking citizenship rights of people born in actual states. There is nothing in the Constitution that would prevent Congress from revoking citizenship rights of people in US territories who were granted by statute.
The 14th Amendment in relavant part holds:
The Constitution's most prominant citizenship provision clearly establishes certain constitutional protections for people born in U.S. states, not territories. Anything else developed by Congress is purely statutory.
Note, the only "issue" I could see with statutory citizenship revocation concerns due process. However, due process only generally requires notice and an opportunity to be heard. Thus, if Congress was to revoke statutory citizenship from those in PR currently possessing it (thus making it retroactive as well as forward looking), I would see some timeline allowed for island residents to migrate to and settle within the US to "vest" their citizenship so to speak. Those who didn't do so by a certain date would likely be left on the outside looking in.
Again, I'm not here to argue with you. Contact the State Department and ask them if they can ignore the Supreme Court declaration and revoke the citizenship of millions of people who have their citizenship against their will by a law. You have your opinion which is wrong and I have the Supreme Court.
There is NO such thing as a statutory citizenship. There are 2 kinds, Natural and Naturalized (Both are given by the powers of Congress) . Both are protected by the Constitution and both can't be taken involuntary declared by the U.S. Supreme Court. This is law and fact not your wrongly opinion.
The only way to give up your citizenship is by ACTION. You have to tell the U.S. Government of your INTENT, they have to accept it, you must first fill out legal forms and you have to change it to an independent country's citizenship of a recognize country by the U.S which accepted your request to take you.
Even if Puerto Rico declares their independence, there is NO legal reason for the U.S. Government to take away their citizenship for the Americans and U.S. Citizens because they choose to live there. Many U.S. Citizens live all over the world. That's not a legal reason to take away your citizenship and your children and their children.
If Puerto Rico declares their independence and the U.S. accepts it, then the people in the island that don't want to be any longer under the U.S. jurisdiction (that's what citizenship is ) has to provide INTENT and sign legal documents to revoke their U.S. Citizenship and the NEW government of Puerto Rico has to put it in their constitution that the only official citizen in Puerto Rico is the Puerto Rican citizen from this date from the people who surrender their American citizenship. That is what sovereignty is. The U.S. Citizens that choose to stay in the island for work, business or school or because they like the beaches will keep their American citizen under the U.S. protection. They will be 2nd class citizens because I'm assuming the independent Puerto Rico will give priority to the citizens of Puerto Rico, it's their country but that is no legal reason to take away the citizenship of Americans involuntary because they want to live there. We are not at war with Puerto Rico.
Supreme Court of the United States Congress has no power under the Constitution to revoke a person's U.S. citizenship unless he voluntarily relinquishes it. In particular, citizenship may not be revoked as a consequence of voting in a foreign election. (Afroyim v. Rusk). This is what scholars and law schools call: " A landmark decision of the US Supreme Court." This is up there with civil rights decisions by the S.C. Your opinions are wrong and my facts are based by the S.C.
Again, I'm not here to argue with you. Contact the State Department and ask them if they can ignore the Supreme Court declaration and revoke the citizenship of millions of people who have their citizenship against their will by a law. You have your opinion which is wrong and I have the Supreme Court.
There is NO such thing as a statutory citizenship. There are 2 kinds, Natural and Naturalized (Both are given by the powers of Congress) . Both are protected by the Constitution and both can't be taken involuntary declared by the U.S. Supreme Court. This is law and fact not your wrongly opinion.
The only way to give up your citizenship is by ACTION. You have to tell the U.S. Government of your INTENT, they have to accept it, you must first fill out legal forms and you have to change it to an independent country's citizenship of a recognize country by the U.S which accepted your request to take you.
Even if Puerto Rico declares their independence, there is NO legal reason for the U.S. Government to take away their citizenship for the Americans and U.S. Citizens because they choose to live there. Many U.S. Citizens live all over the world. That's not a legal reason to take away your citizenship and your children and their children.
If Puerto Rico declares their independence and the U.S. accepts it, then the people in the island that don't want to be any longer under the U.S. jurisdiction (that's what citizenship is ) has to provide INTENT and sign legal documents to revoke their U.S. Citizenship and the NEW government of Puerto Rico has to put it in their constitution that the only official citizen in Puerto Rico is the Puerto Rican citizen from this date from the people who surrender their American citizenship. That is what sovereignty is. The U.S. Citizens that choose to stay in the island for work, business or school or because they like the beaches will keep their American citizen under the U.S. protection. They will be 2nd class citizens because I'm assuming the independent Puerto Rico will give priority to the citizens of Puerto Rico, it's their country but that is no legal reason to take away the citizenship of Americans involuntary because they want to live there. We are not at war with Puerto Rico.
Supreme Court of the United States Congress has no power under the Constitution to revoke a person's U.S. citizenship unless he voluntarily relinquishes it. In particular, citizenship may not be revoked as a consequence of voting in a foreign election. (Afroyim v. Rusk). This is what scholars and law schools call: " A landmark decision of the US Supreme Court." This is up there with civil rights decisions by the S.C. Your opinions are wrong and my facts are based by the S.C.
You need to actual read that Supreme Court opinion and the subsequent developments. That is not what it stands for and the case here would not be analogous. Note, there are plenty of cases where people involuntarily lose their citizenship to this day, to include falsification or concealment of relevant facts, dishonorable military discharge if your citizenship was granted as a condition of military service (there is a time limit established by law for this, though), etc.
Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 09-18-2020 at 10:53 AM..
You need to actual read that Supreme Court opinion and the subsequent developments. That is not what it stands for and the case here would not be analogous. Note, there are plenty of cases where people involuntarily lose their citizenship to this day, to include falsification or concealment of relevant facts, dishonorable military discharge if your citizenship was granted as a condition of military service (there is a time limit established by law for this, though), etc.
I read the Supreme Court Case, you should read it again. If you are a foreigner and falsify your immigration papers that is AN ACTION, you lied on your application. It's voided. If you are a foreigner which the government might grant you legal status based on your military service and you get a dishonorable discharge (convicted in a military court for a felony crime, the worst conviction in the military court ) that is an ACTION from your part that voided the agreement with the U.S government. Foreigners are not protected under the constitution.
None of what you mention applies to Puerto Rico because Puerto Rico is not a foreign nation and the people are not under the military jurisdiction. What matters to Puerto Rico is that Congress can't take away their citizenship involuntarily or because they voted in a foreign election or because they live in a foreign land and it was declared by the U.S. Supreme Court.
For immigration purposes Puerto Rico is declared to be part of the United States by federal statute (along with the U. S. Virgin Islands and Guam). Its natives are natural born U. S. citizens and if Puerto Rico becomes an independent country they could not be stripped of their U. S. citizenship without their consent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would any resulting state be continuous or broken apart into separate tracts of territory? 